1# Heuristics Scoring Guide
  2
  3Score each of Nielsen's 10 Usability Heuristics on a 0–4 scale. Be honest: a 4 means genuinely excellent, not "good enough."
  4
  5## Nielsen's 10 Heuristics
  6
  7### 1. Visibility of System Status
  8
  9Keep users informed about what's happening through timely, appropriate feedback.
 10
 11**Check for**:
 12- Loading indicators during async operations
 13- Confirmation of user actions (save, submit, delete)
 14- Progress indicators for multi-step processes
 15- Current location in navigation (breadcrumbs, active states)
 16- Form validation feedback (inline, not just on submit)
 17
 18**Scoring**:
 19| Score | Criteria |
 20|-------|----------|
 21| 0 | No feedback; user is guessing what happened |
 22| 1 | Rare feedback; most actions produce no visible response |
 23| 2 | Partial; some states communicated, major gaps remain |
 24| 3 | Good; most operations give clear feedback, minor gaps |
 25| 4 | Excellent; every action confirms, progress is always visible |
 26
 27### 2. Match Between System and Real World
 28
 29Speak the user's language. Follow real-world conventions. Information appears in natural, logical order.
 30
 31**Check for**:
 32- Familiar terminology (no unexplained jargon)
 33- Logical information order matching user expectations
 34- Recognizable icons and metaphors
 35- Domain-appropriate language for the target audience
 36- Natural reading flow (left-to-right, top-to-bottom priority)
 37
 38**Scoring**:
 39| Score | Criteria |
 40|-------|----------|
 41| 0 | Pure tech jargon, alien to users |
 42| 1 | Mostly confusing; requires domain expertise to navigate |
 43| 2 | Mixed; some plain language, some jargon leaks through |
 44| 3 | Mostly natural; occasional term needs context |
 45| 4 | Speaks the user's language fluently throughout |
 46
 47### 3. User Control and Freedom
 48
 49Users need a clear "emergency exit" from unwanted states without extended dialogue.
 50
 51**Check for**:
 52- Undo/redo functionality
 53- Cancel buttons on forms and modals
 54- Clear navigation back to safety (home, previous)
 55- Easy way to clear filters, search, selections
 56- Escape from long or multi-step processes
 57
 58**Scoring**:
 59| Score | Criteria |
 60|-------|----------|
 61| 0 | Users get trapped; no way out without refreshing |
 62| 1 | Difficult exits; must find obscure paths to escape |
 63| 2 | Some exits; main flows have escape, edge cases don't |
 64| 3 | Good control; users can exit and undo most actions |
 65| 4 | Full control; undo, cancel, back, and escape everywhere |
 66
 67### 4. Consistency and Standards
 68
 69Users shouldn't wonder whether different words, situations, or actions mean the same thing.
 70
 71**Check for**:
 72- Consistent terminology throughout the interface
 73- Same actions produce same results everywhere
 74- Platform conventions followed (standard UI patterns)
 75- Visual consistency (colors, typography, spacing, components)
 76- Consistent interaction patterns (same gesture = same behavior)
 77
 78**Scoring**:
 79| Score | Criteria |
 80|-------|----------|
 81| 0 | Inconsistent everywhere; feels like different products stitched together |
 82| 1 | Many inconsistencies; similar things look/behave differently |
 83| 2 | Partially consistent; main flows match, details diverge |
 84| 3 | Mostly consistent; occasional deviation, nothing confusing |
 85| 4 | Fully consistent; cohesive system, predictable behavior |
 86
 87### 5. Error Prevention
 88
 89Better than good error messages is a design that prevents problems in the first place.
 90
 91**Check for**:
 92- Confirmation before destructive actions (delete, overwrite)
 93- Constraints preventing invalid input (date pickers, dropdowns)
 94- Smart defaults that reduce errors
 95- Clear labels that prevent misunderstanding
 96- Autosave and draft recovery
 97
 98**Scoring**:
 99| Score | Criteria |
100|-------|----------|
101| 0 | Errors easy to make; no guardrails anywhere |
102| 1 | Few safeguards; some inputs validated, most aren't |
103| 2 | Partial prevention; common errors caught, edge cases slip |
104| 3 | Good prevention; most error paths blocked proactively |
105| 4 | Excellent; errors nearly impossible through smart constraints |
106
107### 6. Recognition Rather Than Recall
108
109Minimize memory load. Make objects, actions, and options visible or easily retrievable.
110
111**Check for**:
112- Visible options (not buried in hidden menus)
113- Contextual help when needed (tooltips, inline hints)
114- Recent items and history
115- Autocomplete and suggestions
116- Labels on icons (not icon-only navigation)
117
118**Scoring**:
119| Score | Criteria |
120|-------|----------|
121| 0 | Heavy memorization; users must remember paths and commands |
122| 1 | Mostly recall; many hidden features, few visible cues |
123| 2 | Some aids; main actions visible, secondary features hidden |
124| 3 | Good recognition; most things discoverable, few memory demands |
125| 4 | Everything discoverable; users never need to memorize |
126
127### 7. Flexibility and Efficiency of Use
128
129Accelerators, invisible to novices, speed up expert interaction.
130
131**Check for**:
132- Keyboard shortcuts for common actions
133- Customizable interface elements
134- Recent items and favorites
135- Bulk/batch actions
136- Power user features that don't complicate the basics
137
138**Scoring**:
139| Score | Criteria |
140|-------|----------|
141| 0 | One rigid path; no shortcuts or alternatives |
142| 1 | Limited flexibility; few alternatives to the main path |
143| 2 | Some shortcuts; basic keyboard support, limited bulk actions |
144| 3 | Good accelerators; keyboard nav, some customization |
145| 4 | Highly flexible; multiple paths, power features, customizable |
146
147### 8. Aesthetic and Minimalist Design
148
149Interfaces should not contain irrelevant or rarely needed information. Every element should serve a purpose.
150
151**Check for**:
152- Only necessary information visible at each step
153- Clear visual hierarchy directing attention
154- Purposeful use of color and emphasis
155- No decorative clutter competing for attention
156- Focused, uncluttered layouts
157
158**Scoring**:
159| Score | Criteria |
160|-------|----------|
161| 0 | Overwhelming; everything competes for attention equally |
162| 1 | Cluttered; too much noise, hard to find what matters |
163| 2 | Some clutter; main content clear, periphery noisy |
164| 3 | Mostly clean; focused design, minor visual noise |
165| 4 | Perfectly minimal; every element earns its pixel |
166
167### 9. Help Users Recognize, Diagnose, and Recover from Errors
168
169Error messages should use plain language, precisely indicate the problem, and constructively suggest a solution.
170
171**Check for**:
172- Plain language error messages (no error codes for users)
173- Specific problem identification ("Email is missing @" not "Invalid input")
174- Actionable recovery suggestions
175- Errors displayed near the source of the problem
176- Non-blocking error handling (don't wipe the form)
177
178**Scoring**:
179| Score | Criteria |
180|-------|----------|
181| 0 | Cryptic errors; codes, jargon, or no message at all |
182| 1 | Vague errors; "Something went wrong" with no guidance |
183| 2 | Clear but unhelpful; names the problem but not the fix |
184| 3 | Clear with suggestions; identifies problem and offers next steps |
185| 4 | Perfect recovery; pinpoints issue, suggests fix, preserves user work |
186
187### 10. Help and Documentation
188
189Even if the system is usable without docs, help should be easy to find, task-focused, and concise.
190
191**Check for**:
192- Searchable help or documentation
193- Contextual help (tooltips, inline hints, guided tours)
194- Task-focused organization (not feature-organized)
195- Concise, scannable content
196- Easy access without leaving current context
197
198**Scoring**:
199| Score | Criteria |
200|-------|----------|
201| 0 | No help available anywhere |
202| 1 | Help exists but hard to find or irrelevant |
203| 2 | Basic help; FAQ or docs exist, not contextual |
204| 3 | Good documentation; searchable, mostly task-focused |
205| 4 | Excellent contextual help; right info at the right moment |
206
207---
208
209## Score Summary
210
211**Total possible**: 40 points (10 heuristics × 4 max)
212
213| Score Range | Rating | What It Means |
214|-------------|--------|---------------|
215| 36–40 | Excellent | Minor polish only; ship it |
216| 28–35 | Good | Address weak areas, solid foundation |
217| 20–27 | Acceptable | Significant improvements needed before users are happy |
218| 12–19 | Poor | Major UX overhaul required; core experience broken |
219| 0–11 | Critical | Redesign needed; unusable in current state |
220
221---
222
223## Issue Severity (P0–P3)
224
225Tag each individual issue found during scoring with a priority level:
226
227| Priority | Name | Description | Action |
228|----------|------|-------------|--------|
229| **P0** | Blocking | Prevents task completion entirely | Fix immediately; this is a showstopper |
230| **P1** | Major | Causes significant difficulty or confusion | Fix before release |
231| **P2** | Minor | Annoyance, but workaround exists | Fix in next pass |
232| **P3** | Polish | Nice-to-fix, no real user impact | Fix if time permits |
233
234**Tip**: If you're unsure between two levels, ask: "Would a user contact support about this?" If yes, it's at least P1.